20 April, 2019

Blog

Regulatory Capture: The Worst Public Enemy Imaginable

By W.A. Wijewardena

Dr W.A. Wijewardena

The banning of sand mining in rivers in Sri Lanka

In 2008, Sri Lankan authorities, supported by its Supreme Court, banned sand mining in rivers and internal reservoirs. The measure was well-intentioned as proclaimed by many experts on the subject. According to them, sand mining in rivers had caused irreversible environmental damage. Some of these damages had been documented and could not be ignored: Sand mining had caused sea water to seep inland through receded river mouths, destroyed the now fragile river banks and lowered the water table in adjoining areas making the land dry and unsuitable for cultivation. On top of this, rivers which are the main contributors to the natural formation of Sri Lanka’s sandy beaches by depositing the sand which they carry constantly could not do, according to experts, their job effectively without a sufficient quantity of sand available in them. Hence, the country faced the risk of faster sea erosion which had to be prevented through artificial means at great costs. Hence, despite the unaffordable increase in the price of sand which in turn raised the cost of construction, everyone hailed it as a public policy taken in the right direction. So the hope of the public that the measure would bring overall good to society ran very high and there was no doubt about its failure on any count.

The abuse of the good-intentioned public intervention

But the outcome of the measure as was unravelled subsequently was different. As had been predicted by economists a few decades ago, the good intentioned public policy had been captured by ‘captors’. The list of the captors in this case has been too long: Politicians, underground gangs, local officials, law enforcement officers and truckers. The result: Sand mining in rivers went on unabated, river sand was still supplied to those who could afford the new high prices which went up in multiple terms and many people who were strangers to this business made money out of the banned economic activity. But who paid those strangers who made money? They were the people who used river sand for constructing residential and commercial buildings on the one side and tax payers who financed the public construction programmes which have now been inflated due to the increases in costs on the other. Consequently, a good intentioned public regulation had gone sour.

Regulations are automatically captured by interest groups

The sad fate of sand mining regulation and of many other public regulations – from utilities to finance to banking to consumer protection and so on – is an undesired consequence of regulation which economists now call the ‘regulatory capture’. In fact, it was the Harvard University’s political scientist Samuel P Huntington who first came up with the idea that interest groups have incentives to influence regulatory agencies in a paper published in 1952. But the formal development of the concept in terms of economics was done by Chicago University economist and Nobel Laureate, George J Stigler, in 1971in a paper published in the Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science under the title “The Theory of Economic Regulation”. The term regulatory capture was not coined by Stigler, but by another political scientist, Marver H Bernstein, formerly at Princeton University and at that time President of the Brandeis University, in a paper published in 1972. In this paper titled “Independent Regulatory Agencies: A Perspective on Their Reform”, Bernstein said that “most familiar charge against independent commissions is that they develop an orientation toward the views and interests of their clientele and become ripe for capture” thereby giving birth to the term regulatory capture. Today, the regulatory capture theory in public policy is a well established proposition and it represents the main arguments presented for establishing the failure of the government. Hence, the need for eliminating the same in the public policy system is as important as eliminating bribery and corruption – another important source of the government’s failure.

Regulatory capture is a source of government failure

The regulatory capture means that the regulations imposed by governments for the benefit of the public are being captured by those who are to be regulated or by others who stand to gain out of regulatory mechanisms. For instance, a government, with all the good intentions, may impose regulations on, say drug companies. But the drug companies have all the incentives to get the regulation which is hostile to them turned to their advantage by diluting its intensity thereby defeating the purpose of regulation. For this, they start financing the politicians, physicians, researchers at the drug administration agencies and law enforcement officers and take the regulatory mechanism under their control. Since the regulations now serve not the public but those who are supposed to be regulated, the whole regulatory mechanism has been captured by them and that process is termed regulatory capture.

Action to correct market failure leads to government failure

The regulatory capture theory throws light on a paradox in public policy. Public policy is justified and regulations are imposed in order to correct a situation which economists have identified as “market failure”. Market failure means that the market system does not bring about an ideal situation because of the presence of monopolies, self-interest driven businessmen who are more powerful than consumers, people causing harm to others without paying for their sins known as ‘external costs’, in the opposite people benefiting from the fruits of others without paying for same known as ‘external benefits’ and the need for producing and supplying of beneficial public services collectively known as public goods. Hence, it has been argued that societies cannot rely on markets and, in wider public interest, the governments should intervene in the markets through appropriate public policies. These policies involve the setting up of governmental agencies financed by tax payers and those agencies seek to achieve their objectives by imposing regulations on businesses or citizens. The underlying assumption is that the market failure has to be corrected by governments which are not supposed to fail in their enterprises. However, the regulatory capture theory suggests the opposite.

Tolerating market failure may be preferable to subjecting to government failure

Gary Becker, Nobel Laureate of Chicago University fame, in a paper contributed to the first issue of the Journal of Law and Economics in 1958 under the title “Competition and Democracy”, asked the question whether the existence of market imperfections does justify the governmental intervention. He went on to answer this question by saying “no”, if the imperfections in government behaviour were greater than those in the market. The regulatory capture theory suggests the imperfections in the governmental behaviour are greater because the governments are captured by interest groups including the politicians. Hence, by allowing these groups to run an economy, societies lose on two counts. Count number one is that the objectives of the regulatory mechanism are not realised and they simply become a waste of public funds. Count number two is the more stressful development: It says that the regulatory mechanisms, however much they are well-intentioned, create a class of people who prey as predators on the honest work of the members of the society. This class consists of politicians who are paid for by groups intending to capture the regulators, people on the regulatory agencies themselves and businesses and people who capture the regulators. This class thrives in a society and eventually emerges as monsters that cannot be tamed because they capture the political power as well. To support their monstrous activities, they bring under their control the regulatory agencies, media, the police and other law enforcement agencies and the judiciary as well. Eventually, society’s wealth is misdistributed in favour of the regulatory captors who have all the incentives to impose more regulations because they stand to gain out of them.

Self-interested politicians defeat libertarians

This is the crux of the battle between the libertarian economists and the centre to left economists in 1970s. The libertarian economists respected freedom to hold and develop private property for one’s benefit, act according to one’s conscience without the fear of being persecuted and participate in political processes as effective members of society. This calls for adherence to democratic principles at all levels. In the opposite, the centre to left economists argued that restriction to democracy is justified on the ground of providing greater benefits to some and correcting the perceived evils in the economic system. This battle was won at political levels defeating the libertarians and deciding in favour of the latter group of economists. They were supported by politicians, bureaucrats and public policy makers since they all stood to gain out of a regulated economy. The result was the inundation of economies with various types of public policies which were all introduced with good intentions but eventually captured by interest groups.

Hayek: Capitalism is needed for democracy to work

Nobel Laureate Friedrich A Von Hayek, in a publication as far back as 1939 under the title “Freedom and Economic System”, argued cogently for democracy and capitalism: He said in this book that “It is often said that democracy will not tolerate capitalism” summarisng the popular view at that time that true democracy requires the institution of socialism in a society to ensure a fair deal to everyone concerned. But Hayek said that capitalism means a competitive society based on a free disposal of private property and it is only capitalism which makes democracy possible. In his 1944 book, The Road to Serfdom, Hayek further elaborated his point by arguing that socialist type of economic planning and hence, economic regulations, lead only to make mankind serfs depending on the benefactor – handouts passed by feudalist aristocracies. Going by Hayek, Gary Becker in his article in 1958 argued that it may not be preferable to regulate monopolies. He said that it maybe preferable to suffer the ill-effects of monopolies rather than subjecting a society to the ill-effects of political imperfections. Hence, the government failure with all powerful politicians running an economy, according to these economists, is more costly than the perceived market failure.

The life cycle of a regulatory agency

Marver H Bernstein in his 1955 paper has presented a life-cycle for a regulatory agency and according to that life-cycle a regulatory agency has to die one day. This resembles the law of nature relating to natural phenomena: Every natural phenomenon has a birth, existence and eventual death.

Gestation: Regulator lives in the past

Similarly, Bernstein said that every regulatory agency will pass through four stages, namely, gestation, youth, maturity and old-age. According to his observations relating to USA, within about 20 years all regulatory agencies complete this cycle. In the gestation period, the regulatory agency which is created as a solution to a crisis starts growing into a regulator, but based on a statutory structure which is out of date by the time it is enacted. Hence, the agency lives in the past forever. To justify its existence and funding by the tax-payers, it focuses on short-term issues rather than thinking of long-term sustainability of an economy.

Youth: Desire to be a crusader

The youth of the agency is marked by an era characterised by desire to act as a crusader in a conflict-infested environment. Hence, it is guided by vague objectives and to make the matters worse, it lacks experience and knowledge. This makes the agency more vulnerable to interest groups which are more knowledgeable and experienced. It starts losing public trust and support from politicians because those who had earlier established the agency have now retired from political life. The new occupants to the political office do not have the same vigour of continuing with the agency’s work.

Maturity: Reactive instead of being proactive

The agency goes through the maturity period by developing a passive outlook and apathetic approach to issues. It usually reacts to events instead of being proactive and hence, its interventions are too short and too late. It starts to maintain good relations with those who are to be regulated and therefore, the intensity of regulation gets diluted substantially. With inefficiency creeping in, a backlog of cases accumulates and the agency fails to perform its job properly without hiring additional staff which is resisted by Treasuries on the ground of controlling public finances. The result is the agency becoming less and less active in its field.

Old-age: As good as being dead

The old-age is equal to the status of a retiree from the public service: No longer interested in keeping the knowledge base updated, unwilling to change, declared commitment to maintain status quo and becoming irrelevant in the eyes of those who are being served. The staff increases in number but declines in quality since the old-hands are promoted to high position without regard for ability or efficiency. Thus, the management becomes poor and the agency sets to have a cordial working arrangement with those who are to be regulated. Increasingly, it comes under pressure from politicians who do not allocate funds for its modernisation unless it becomes servile to their interests. Overall, the agency becomes senile with debility built into the whole organisation and is as good as a dead man.

The public succumbs to crafty propaganda of politicians

Thus, good public policies which are introduced with so much of hopes at the time of introduction become perverse to the society over the natural life span of a regulatory agency by allowing itself to be captured by interest groups. Though this is known, the demand by politicians and the public is for more and more public policies and regulations. The politicians do so because they stand to gain. The public does so because they are made to believe that regulations are for their benefit through effective propaganda aiming at arousing patriotic, nationalistic or religious feelings.

How to limit the regulatory capture?

After the bad experience with regulatory capture in the last century, an independent think-tank called The Tobin Project based in Massachusetts in USA implemented a special project on regulatory capture in 2009. Its report titled “Preventing Regulatory Capture: Special Interest Influence and How to Limit It” is to be released shortly by the Cambridge University Press. However, the papers in the volume have been released to the web for free use by the interested scholars (available here ). The papers have argued that to limit the regulatory capture, consumer groups have to be empowered to check on the influence of the industry on regulators, the court system should be strengthened to review the regulatory action and declare whether it is legal or illegal and a central review system of the regulatory action should be established with powers to look at the regulatory work from both prospective and retrospective points of view.

The rule of law and an independent judiciary a must

Since the consumer groups, judiciary and central review agencies can also be manipulated by the special interest groups, especially all powerful political authorities, the whole issue boils down to three basic requirements to be put in place. They are the observance of the Rule of Law, the preservation of the independence of the judiciary and respecting the work done by both formal and informal institutions that have dedicated themselves to eliminate the possible regulatory capture by interest groups.

*W.A Wijewardena can be reached at waw1949@gmail.com 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 0
    0

    A every good article attracting the attention of readers away from the current misdeamenours of the Regime.This is food for thought for Academics to do research on this matter.Regulatory capture is openly seen through many news items showing the people pointing fingers at politicians ,the police, gramasevake for their inaction in the face of destroying the forest cover or sand mining.

  • 0
    0

    President Rajapakse is planning to hire British and International Law firms,foreign advocacy and activists groups,legal aid and consulting firms, Lobbying groups, advertising and media houses, and plan to spend untold amount of foreign currency to fight next March UNHR session.

    Also MR plan to buy out many UN foreign ministries paying untold amount of foreign exchange, similar to the One and a half million US Dollars paid to Ugandan UN rep.
    Also Sri Lanka’s Marxist party Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) says the government is engaged in offering economic bribes to members of the international community in order to overcome the pressure posed by them.
    Please read following web.
    http://www.colombopage.com/archive_13A/Feb04_1359992591JR.php

    Also during the Sri Lanka 65 year Independence church service the Anglican Bishop of Colombo Rt. Reverend Dhiloraj Canagasabey called Christians yesterday to be prophets who speak out against unjust systems.

    http://www.ft.lk/2013/02/05/bishop-asks-christians-to-speak-out-against-injustice/

    Therefore unless all country loving citizens speak against unjust while speak openly for their rights, liberty and freedom, MR will use all his weapons to silance the mases with fake patriotism.

    What my prediction is….. I AM MUCH POSITIVE NOW THAN EVER WITH ALL THESE SPENDING AT UNHR STILL NORTH IS GOING TO BE A CENTRAL TAMIL HOMELAND AND ALSO REST OF THE COUNTR’S FUTURE IS UNPREDICTABLE.\

    NONE WILL BE ABLE TO STOP IT……..AND ALL HAPPENED DUE TO MARA’S BLUNDER.

    MR SPOILT THE SOUP AFTER WINNING THE WAR AND NOW THE SINHALA PEOPLE ARE HELPLESS AND THEY WILL BE THE MINORITY IN FUTURE SRI LANKA.

    TAKE MY WORD TODAY.

  • 0
    0

    Thanks for this! The same sort of environmental degradation with collusion form the so-called authorities and military with Gotabaya the UDA White Van goon’s patronage, is going on in central Colombo where the military footprint is massive – in the Viharamahadevi Park and the independence square, where valuable, timber rich old trees are being cut down and/ or chemically treated, killed and cut down and replaced by saplings.. It has been noted that the valuable trees to be destroyed are marked beforehand with chalk crosses and police traffic tape (black and yellow tape)!
    Every few weeks a couple of old and valuable trees disappear from these parks which are maintained by the Navy and Army which have camps in the area. When the tree cutting was recently reported to Cinnamon Gardens police station, the OIC said that he was “not interested and could do nothing as the tree cutting was the responsibility of the Municipality and the complaint should be made there. What do the Lankan tax payers pay the bloated police and military for?!
    Colombo’s public areas are being denuded of trees and the city is being turned into a concrete jungle of over-paved massive roads so that the Rajapassa brats can race their Lamburghinis.. The uneducated Rajapassa Brother’s idea of development is NOT SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT – but rather fast cars in a concrete jungle with the destruction of institution and human resources!

  • 0
    0

    Who cares about the majority of citizens who take public transport – buses and trains in the miracle of Asia?!
    The Sri Lanka Railway is completely neglected, the station toilets stink, while millions are dumped into the billion-rupee-loss-making airline Mihin Lanka. What are we to make of this ridiculous state of affairs? The development model of the uneducated Rajapass brothers of LA petrol pump fame is for the rich to fly around in helitours and speed race in Lambughinis!
    At the World Travel Market in London, Philippe Rossiter, Chief Executive of the Institute of Hospitality, said that “the railways in Sri Lanka has locomotive and the carriages that are obsolete or too old … [the] authorities should take immediate steps to improve the rolling stock and change the archaic operations � if Sri Lanka improves its railways the country could rake in millions of dollars.”

    • 0
      0

      The most attractive mode of transport of any tourist is to travel by train.
      Train ride is the most comfortable and the best way to see country side. But our train service is in a most horrible and delipidated state.

      Form not coming on time and constant delays upto the uncomfortable rides and constant stop overs due to constant signal failurs, with no clean toilets, canteens, comfortable seats, constant jerks,high noise, no fans,internal TV, radio, ventilation and sleepers etc make train ride one of the most uncomfortable rides bfor pleasure in Sri Lanka.

      It’s high time Govt. refurbish the whole train service.

      I hope many Govt.ministers and officials who constantly travel abroad (Europe, USA, France, Japan, China ect.) would have travelled in those trains.

      Over to you Mr.Minister of Transport.

  • 0
    0

    Just imagine the sandmining going on in the army-controlled North (and the East): a glimpse into the problem:
    Moves to ban illegal sand mining in Jaffna, Daily News, 13.06.2008

    ”the country faced the risk of faster sea erosion which had to be prevented through artificial means at great costs”

    Pl give a thought to the North and the East under army control and patronage politics of most virulence(yes ptronage politics is all over the island , but the govt trying to reduce the power of TNA ”Tamil UPFA” have dangerous levels of patronage):

    Tamils have been attacked and murdered for objecting to it.

    • 0
      0

      Very many thanks for bringing out this piece of writing.

  • 0
    0

    A fine and thoughtful article. The conclusions are quite accurate. The moment the regulators step in, the product is doomed and the effect is just the opposite of what was promised. As I was told recently, stringent laws are being put into effect to reduce smoking, PHI’s are threatening boutique keepers to stop selling cigarettes, when the traders complain of not knowing what to do with their stocks, the PHI’s buy it from them and sell them to their friends at much lower prices. The regulators are now in the business! This is a very simple example of the writer’s theory coming true.

  • 0
    0

    1. Even if we don’t consider the shortage of sand we shouldn’t be building hundreds of Buddha statues all over the place while acting extremely contrary to the philosophy.

    2. Now with the shortage of sand and increasing population, it’s most urgently needed to stop the madness of putting up these statues filling up the space where there should be greenery or other useful things.

    3. Pl connect this article with ”Amber Light Signals Requiring Pro-active Action by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission” of 6 October 2010 on Groundviews and folks, let us not lose time and sand and environment to gain disaster.

    • 0
      0

      While rest of the world go Green our Govt.Gon harakas are building concrete
      structures all over the country.

      While in JFK international airport an Airline lands and take off every 5 minutes….in Ratmalana aircraft lands and take off every two hours. So why we needed another airport in Mattala.

      For emergency purposes Govt. could have refurbished Ratmalana airport.

      It needs electricity, gas,water and logistics almost equalant to a town to cater to an international Airport.

      When the electricity board cannot even supply to the present consumers, how can it think of supplying to another Hambanthota International Airport…….when even adequate number of Airlines have not sign up yet.

      DONKEYS ARE BORN AND CANNOT BE CORRECTED.

  • 0
    0

    What we have is the political capture of all profitable activities by the stooges and henchmen of the govt. These are the mudalalis and contractors who fund the politicians at election time and now are being paid back with interest plus commission. Ultimate victim is the maha janthawa who have to pay astronomical prices for a cube of sand, metal, vegetables, onions, you name it.

    Govt bill to take over private companies and divinesuma are similiar projects of the family. More like Ali Baba and the 102 thieves, record number of ministers. With the appointment of the sugar minister, price of sugar is bound to go up.

    Health Minister imposes regulations and taxes on the private medical system resulting in increased prices. UDA imposes regulations and taxes on payment hawkers and public has to bear the incresed burden etc.

  • 0
    0

    While in JFK international airport an Airline lands and take off every 5 minutes….in Ratmalana aircraft lands and take off every two hours. So why we
    ————-
    needed another airport in Mattala.

    Sorry, it’s Katunayake Airport.

  • 0
    0

    This is a part of series of articles by this writer on some very important themes – corruption, central banking and inflation, regulation forming – with some relevant references with the goal of making the reader think beyond just news, about public policy, how regulation making works for us.

    Yet, the articles themselves have inherent issues with regard to the clarity of the message. For example, in this piece, while we all agree on the purpose of the regulation on sand mining, it is not clear through the article. It says

    “The result: Sand mining in rivers went on unabated, river sand was still supplied to those who could afford the new high prices which went up in multiple terms and many people who were strangers to this business made money out of the banned economic activity.”

    Does the article say,

    a)yes, the regulations limiting sand mining are there, but people who could influence “enforcement of the regulations” enabling some actors to engage in this banned economic activity, operate in made money, as we heard also related to an incident involving MPs and higher ups?

    or

    b) there is no purpose in these regulations, for example, vehicles with no signal lights, sand transporting without permits?

    When one speaks of regulatory traps as the worst enemy, may I suggest that it is extremely risky if it is not clarified whether one says, don’t impose regulations if a) the acceptable standards of policy dialogue is not conducted in regulation making and b) enforcement is not possible with rule of law free of other influences as it’s the common people who fall into regulatory traps and the in a) and b) two traps are fundamentally different ?

    Of course, these raise many more questions -what are acceptable standards in policy making – but, that at another occasion.

  • 0
    0

    Another aspect of regulatory capture is EPF / ETF. Employees and Employers are forced to deposit money in these funds and the Central Bank / Govt use / misuse these moneys as they please. As the COPE findings reveal

    ‘The Rs. 1 trillion-rich Employees Provident Fund’s (EPF) listed equity investment portfolio worth Rs. 74 billion has lost Rs. 12 billion in value it has been revealed.
    In a report on the EPF’s present situation and operational activities to the Committee on Public Accounts (COPA) last week, the Auditor General’s Department has said that as of 15 January 2013, Rs. 54 billion worth of EPF investments in relation to 57 listed companies had lost Rs. 11.7 billion of their value.’ – FT

    “In July 2010 Rs. 500 million was spent to purchase 1,863,676 shares of a company. Up to 30 June 2012, no income has been earned since the date of investment,” the report states.
    Addressing a media briefing last week UNP MP R. Yogarajan said that although the Auditor General’s report does not indicate the name of the finance company, the EPF divulged it was a transaction pertaining to The Finance when COPE queried the officials.
    “At the time the decision to invest in these shares was made it had not been taken into consideration that the last published accounts of the company had revealed a loss of Rs. 4.28 billion. In the preceding year as well the company had incurred a loss of Rs. 3.83 billion. A share had been purchased at the price of Rs. 40.36 whereas as of 31 July 2012, the value of one of these shares at the Stock Exchange was Rs. 24. From the date this investment was made no income has been earned for the fund,” the Auditor General’s Department Report to COPE says.

    This is the tip of an iceberg and govt and Cabral should be held personally responsible.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 300 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically shut off on articles after 10 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.